• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

WaPo & NYT Reporters Didn't Want to Cover Bill Clinton/Loretta Lynch Meeting

ModerateGOP said:
The article was in past tense. They were unenthusiastic about covering the story. Again, what were they supposed to be excited about covering? Can you name the event that was supposed to be earth-shattering breaking news? If I were a reporter, I wouldn't be enthusiastic about covering Trump flying to NJ either.
Click to expand...

The AG investigating a candidate having a private sitdown with the hubby. That's not something to get excited about?
 
Harshaw said:
That PDF is 413 pages long.

You read the first one. And only the first one.

Wow.
Click to expand...
The point is that it's an ABC reporter and the DOJ, not the NY Times. I don't have the time to read all 413 pages, which includes press releases. But I don't see why the NYT would find a need to report this. According to the statements, the two met on a plane and they said they didn't speak about anything consequential. What's the story here?

I think what this thread is, is trying to be is a distraction from real criminality in the current White House.
 
MTAtech said:
The point is that it's an ABC reporter and the DOJ, not the NY Times.
Click to expand...

So? It's also not the only e-mail included in 413 pages.

I don't have the time to read all 413 pages, which includes press releases.
Click to expand...

Then that's your own epistemological deficiency. Not my problem.

But I don't see why the NYT would find a need to report this. According to the statements, the two met on a plane and they said they didn't speak about anything consequential.
Click to expand...

So they say.

What's the story here?
Click to expand...

If you need to have it explained why there should be interest when a former President takes a private meeting with the Attorney General just days before the DoJ is going to announce whether they're going to prosecute his WIFE, who also happens to be the apparent Democratic Party nominee for President, then this head-in-sand-sticking of Olympian proportions.

I think what this thread is, is trying to be is a distraction from real criminality in the current White House.
Click to expand...

If you are not capable of entertaining multiple topics simultaneously, do not impart that limitation on others.

Never mind that no one mentioned the current White House in this thread until now, so you're in essence saying "yeah? What about TRUMP? Huh??"
 
Harshaw said:
Nor did I claim anything happened which didn't actually happen.

You're making things up, again.
Click to expand...

lolz. What evidence do you have that something happened on the tarmac that is supposed to have been of note for reporters to cover?
 
ModerateGOP said:
lolz. What evidence do you have that something happened on the tarmac that is supposed to have been of note for reporters to cover?
Click to expand...

I already stated exactly what happened on the tarmac which should be of interest, and none of what happened is in dispute. If you don't get it by now, oh, well.
 
Harshaw said:
So? It's also not the only e-mail included in 413 pages.



Then that's your own epistemological deficiency. Not my problem.



So they say.



If you need to have it explained why there should be interest when a former President takes a private meeting with the Attorney General just days before the DoJ is going to announce whether they're going to prosecute his WIFE, who also happens to be the apparent Democratic Party nominee for President, then this head-in-sand-sticking of Olympian proportions.



If you are not capable of entertaining multiple topics simultaneously, do not impart that limitation on others.

Never mind that no one mentioned the current White House in this thread until now, so you're in essence saying "yeah? What about TRUMP? Huh??"
Click to expand...

Clinton engineered this meeting. http://observer.com/2016/07/exclusi...-bill-clinton-maneuver-to-meet-loretta-lynch/

The impropriety shouldn't have to be explained.
 
Harshaw said:
I already stated exactly what happened on the tarmac which should be of interest, and none of what happened is in dispute. If you don't get it by now, oh, well.
Click to expand...

And your evidence is where?
 
ModerateGOP said:
And your evidence is where?
Click to expand...

Point by point:

Bill Clinton is a former President of the United States.

Bill Clinton's wife is Hillary Clinton.

MV5BZjM3MzhiZWUtMGQ3MC00MmMyLThhZWYtYTRmZGI1YjAxODY2XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNzc5NjM0NA@@._V1_.jpg

Loretta Lynch was Attorney General of the United States from April 27, 2015 to January 20, 2017.

On a day included within her term of office, June 27, 2016, Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton held a private meeting on her private plane at Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix, AZ.

On June 27th, Hillary Clinton was the presumptive nominee for President of the Democratic Party.

She was also under criminal investigation by the FBI.

The Attorney General is the head of the Department of Justice.

The FBI is a division of the Department of Justice, under the Attorney General.

The June 27th meeting was only days before the FBI announced that it doesn't recommend criminal charges against Hillary Clinton.

That covers everything I said:

Harshaw said:
So . . .

A former President holding a private meeting on a plane with the Attorney General, mere days before the DoJ was going to announce whether or not they were going to prosecute his wife, who also happened to be the apparent major-party nominee for President, isn't a major story? It's not the kind of thing that reporters would normally salivate over?

Really?
Click to expand...

Do you need to be nursemaided through any other matters of undisputed fact?
 
ModerateGOP said:
lolz. What evidence do you have that something happened on the tarmac that is supposed to have been of note for reporters to cover?
Click to expand...

Oh, come on. You cannot be this naive.
 
truthatallcost said:
You haven't 'debunked' anything. The fact is that these reporters' loyalty is to their political party masters, not to journalism or their readers. It's not entirely unique; Politico was exposed as being in the bag for Clinton, and CNN employed people who supplied Clinton with inside information.

When the tarmac story was unfolding, it was their job to cover it, but they showed themselves to be in collusion with the DNC. We all suspected as much, but I'm just documenting it.
Click to expand...

Indeed that the 'news' (tabloid political propaganda) media have loyalty to their democratic political masters.

A long list of Hillary’s actions which raise suspicion and foundation of her obstructing justice and being corrupt as hell.



Indeed a long list of Hillary’s actions which raise suspicion and foundation of her obstructing justice and being corrupt as hell, as well as the FBI’s utter incompetence and / or unwillingness and / or corruption during their 'investigation' of that ‘matter’ (in the tank for Hillary), none of which was condemned by the news media, and certainly not nearly as much as chasing and continuing to inflate the ghosts of 'Russian Collusion'.
 
Harshaw said:
Point by point:

Bill Clinton is a former President of the United States.

Bill Clinton's wife is Hillary Clinton.

View attachment 67221000

Loretta Lynch was Attorney General of the United States from April 27, 2015 to January 20, 2017.

On a day included within her term of office, June 27, 2016, Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton held a private meeting on her private plane at Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix, AZ.

On June 27th, Hillary Clinton was the presumptive nominee for President of the Democratic Party.

She was also under criminal investigation by the FBI.

The Attorney General is the head of the Department of Justice.

The FBI is a division of the Department of Justice, under the Attorney General.

The June 27th meeting was only days before the FBI announced that it doesn't recommend criminal charges against Hillary Clinton.

That covers everything I said:



Do you need to be nursemaided through any other matters of undisputed fact?
Click to expand...

Where is the audio/video/text of this supposed collusion? You ask the same from Trump. I'm only asking the same for Clinton.
 
ModerateGOP said:
Where is the audio/video/text of this supposed collusion?
Click to expand...

Where did I say anything about a "collusion"? The question was why reporters should be interested in the event.

I answered that question, and everything I said in that answer is undisputed fact.

You have again entirely forgotten what's being said from post to post.

You ask the same from Trump. I'm only asking the same for Clinton.
Click to expand...

See above. That's not the question.
 
Harshaw said:
Where did I say anything about a "collusion"? The question was why reporters should be interested in the event.

I answered that question, and everything I said in that answer is undisputed fact.

You have again entirely forgotten what's being said from post to post.



See above. That's not the question.
Click to expand...

You are the one insisting that reporters be enthusiastic about collusion at the highest levels of government between the AG, and an Ex-President to Pardon his wife. Yes or no?

Why can't you even keep your own CTs straight?

What I am saying is that reporters shouldn't be enthusiastic about a tarmac meeting in which that didn't happen.
 
ModerateGOP said:
You are the one insisting that reporters be enthusiastic about collusion at the highest levels of government between the AG, and an Ex-President to Pardon his wife. Yes or no?

Why can't you even keep your own CTs straight?

What I am saying is that reporters shouldn't be enthusiastic about a tarmac meeting in which that didn't happen.
Click to expand...

I never said anything happened in that meeting.

You're drawing conclusions entirely from the context of it.

Natural conclusions, of course, or at least the natural questions raised.

As such, you've definitively answered the question as to why reporters should have been interested. You prove that you yourself know why, and all of this is charade on your part.
 
Harshaw said:
I never said anything happened in that meeting.

You're drawing conclusions entirely from the context of it.

Natural conclusions, of course, or at least the natural questions raised.

As such, you've definitively answered the question as to why reporters should have been interested. You prove that you yourself know why, and all of this is charade on your part.
Click to expand...

If nothing happened there should be no interest for reporters. No different than if Trump and Pence met on a runway.
 
ModerateGOP said:
If nothing happened there should be no interest for reporters. No different than if Trump and Pence met on a runway.
Click to expand...

Oh, it's considerably different than that, and you know why.

I don't know why you insist on playing stupid here.
 
Harshaw said:
Oh, it's considerably different than that, and you know why.

I don't know why you insist on playing stupid here.
Click to expand...

Alright, it's no different if Trump and Pence met on a runway in ... Moscow :lamo
 
ModerateGOP said:
Alright, it's no different if Trump and Pence met on a runway in ... Moscow :lamo
Click to expand...

Still an utterly inept analogy, but if they did, would you not think that reporters should find it interesting?

You don't have to answer. Of course you would.
 
calamity said:
Sounds like a "nothing burger."
Click to expand...


Apparently, the Fox News producer thought it was a "nothing burger", too....


From the aclj PDF file ....(page 369)


U.S. Department of Justice
Direct: 202-305-1920
Ce (b) (6) ll:
@MelanieDOJ
From: Newman, Melanie (OPA)
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 10:31 AM
To: Axelrod, Matthew (ODAG)
Cc: Pokorny, Carolyn (OAG); Lewis, Kevin S. (OPA); Franklin, Shirlethia (OAG); Kadzik, Peter J (OLA);
Amuluru, Uma (OAG); Herwig, Paige (OAG)

Subject: RE: DRAFT: Statement/Talking Points

I sent the transcript and link to the news clip to the FOX producer. He had already tracked down the
video from the presser. He actually thinks they may not run anything on it today but will keep me
posted. He doesn't think it's news. I also talked to the ABC producer, who noted that they aren't
interested, even if FOX runs with it.

Given this, we are still holding.

Melanie R. Newman
Director, Office of Public Affairs
U.S. Department of Justice
Direct: 202-305-1920
Ce (b) (6) ll:
@MelanieDOJ​



Fox News didn't even think it was news until other news outlets started publishing the story. From what I can tell...ABC15 broke the story and then CBS, CNN, The Hill and WSJ published the story before FoxNews did.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom